Beyond Topical Similarity: Contrastive Evidence Retrieval with Interpretable Attention Alignment in RAG
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Ensuring factuality and interpretability in RAG remains an open and urgent problem. We introduce Contrastive Evidence Rationale Attention (CERA), the first retrieval framework to employ subjectivity-based hard negative selection and inject an evidential inductive bias into contrastive learning through an auxiliary attention alignment loss. CERA fine-tunes a dense retriever using two training objectives: triplet-based contrastive learning and interpretable attention alignment, which supervises CLS-to-token attention using a part-of-speech-weighted masking distribution over human-annotated factual rationales as evidence signals. Experiments on a large corpus of clinical trial reports demonstrate that the subjectivity-based hard negative selection substantially improves retrieval effectiveness compared to both Contriever and hard negative selection baselines. Furthermore, rationale alignment improves faithfulness while maintaining competitive retrieval performance, supporting the hypothesis that attention can serve as a more faithful explanation of model behavior when guided by human rationales. Moving beyond topical similarity, CERA enables the retriever to identify the specific tokens that constitute supporting evidence, promoting more interpretable evidence selection in RAG systems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 34 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 May 2026.
Builds on
34 of 52 references.
References · 34
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
- 2021SimCSE: Simple Contrastive Learning of Sentence Embeddingscited by 2,168
- 2021Unsupervised Dense Information Retrieval with Contrastive Learningcited by 1,203
- 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,081
- 2020Approximate Nearest Neighbor Negative Contrastive Learning for Dense Text Retrievalcited by 846
- 2023Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Contextcited by 820
- 2023In-Context Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 694
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
- 2020Contrastive Learning with Hard Negative Samplescited by 619
- 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 523
22 more
- 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 387
- 2023Evaluating Verifiability in Generative Search Enginescited by 297
- 2023RAGTruth: A Hallucination Corpus for Developing Trustworthy Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 272
- 2020How Context Affects Language Models' Factual Predictionscited by 181
- 2024Fact, Fetch, and Reason: A Unified Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 158
- 2022Improving the Factual Correctness of Radiology Report Generation with Semantic Rewardscited by 82
- 2021Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretabilitycited by 75
- 2019Attention Interpretability Across NLP Taskscited by 71
- 2019Inferring Which Medical Treatments Work from Reports of Clinical Trialscited by 63
- 2020ALICE: Active Learning with Contrastive Natural Language Explanationscited by 36
- 2021Improving the Faithfulness of Attention-based Explanations with Task-specific Information for Text Classificationcited by 29
- 2025Removal of Hallucination on Hallucination: Debate-Augmented RAGcited by 29
- 2024Learning Interpretable Legal Case Retrieval via Knowledge-Guided Case Reformulationcited by 15
- 2025Toward Structured Knowledge Reasoning: Contrastive Retrieval-Augmented Generation on Experiencecited by 7
- 2022Hard Negatives or False Negatives: Correcting Pooling Bias in Training Neural Ranking Modelscited by 6
- 2024Contrastive Learning to Improve Retrieval for Real-world Fact Checkingcited by 6
- 2025Biases Propagate in Encoder-based Vision-Language Models: A Systematic Analysis From Intrinsic Measures to Zero-shot Retrieval Outcomescited by 6
- 2025EqualizeIR: Mitigating Linguistic Biases in Retrieval Modelscited by 5
- 2025Ranking Free RAG: Replacing Re-ranking with Selection in RAG for Sensitive Domainscited by 5
- 2026Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection with Moral Rationalescited by 5
- 2024Discovering Biases in Information Retrieval Models Using Relevance Thesaurus as Global Explanationcited by 4
- 2026Can LLMs Accurately Score Medical Diagnoses and Clinical Reasoning?cited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Factuality and Transparency Are All RAG Needs! Self-Explaining Contrastive Evidence Re-ranking
- 2026Utility-Oriented Visual Evidence Selection for Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2026Assessing the Downstream Utility of Evidence-Aware Retrieval in RAG
- 2026Facet-Level Tracing of Evidence Uncertainty and Hallucination in RAG
- 2026FIDES: Faithful Inference via Deep Evidence Signals for Retrieval-Memory Conflict in RAG
- 2026MEG-RAG: Quantifying Multi-modal Evidence Grounding for Evidence Selection in RAG
- 2026CUE-R: Beyond the Final Answer in Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2024SEER: Self-Aligned Evidence Extraction for Retrieval-Augmented Generation